With respect to the customs declaration form given to travellers entering Canada, E311-99: ( a ) which government departments, agencies and organizations have access to the information contained on the form; and ( b ) which laws are, or could be, enforced using that information?

Martin CauchonLiberalMinister of National Revenue and Secretary of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec)

The following is a list of government departments, agencies and organizations that are authorized under section 108 of the Customs Act to have access to E311 travellers' information:

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency, which administers the Plant Protection Act and the Health of Animals Act; Health Canada which administers the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act; Citizenship and Immigration Canada, which administers the Citizenship Act and the Immigration Act; Environment Canada, which administers the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora; and Statistics Canada, which administers the Statistics Act and is the only department that receives information on an ongoing basis due to its statistics collection mandate.

Human Resource Development Canada, HRDC, which administers the Employment Insurance Act. It is important to note that the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency previously had a memorandum of understanding, MOU, with HRDC to share form E311 information. However, since the privacy commissioner's challenge began before the federal court, this information sharing agreement has been suspended. The matter is currently before the courts.

Should a request be made for personal information by a source not mentioned previously, authorization must be received from the traveller specifically stating approval to release the information, as is required under the Privacy Act.

With regard to the reported health effects of baby foods containing soy proteins or soy products: ( a ) has the government taken action to investigate reports that these foods may cause medical problems such as autoimmune thyrodoiditis, birth defects, malignancies, and other types of diseases because of the hormone-like effects of some soy products; ( b ) if so, what investigative action has been taken; and ( c ) as a result of its investigation, does the government have a plan to require health warnings like those required by the World Health Organization on the labels of baby foods?

(a) and (b) The government has investigated the reports on medical problems allegedly caused by soy based infant formula and it has reviewed the scientific literature related to this issue. With the exception of infants with rare medical conditions, such as soy allergy and congenital hypothyroidism, it was concluded that these foods do not pose a risk to those infants that consume them. The government is continuing to monitor the scientific literature for evidence of any health related concerns associated with soy based formula and its constituents.

Recently published preliminary results from a large retrospective study that has followed up adults who were fed soy based formula as infants indicates no significant differences between individuals fed soy formula compared to those fed cow milk based formula in the following variables: weight and height, measurements of precocity and a large number of reproductive and non-reproductive outcomes.

(c) We are not aware of a requirement from the World Health Organization for a health warning on the labels of baby foods.

With regard to soy based infant formulas, Health Canada does not recommend their use for the routine feeding of babies. The statement of the joint working group of the Canadian Paediatric Society, Dietitians of Canada and Health Canada, Nutrition for Healthy Term Infants, published in 1998, emphasizes that breastfeeding is the optimal method of feeding infants and encourages exclusive breastfeeding for at least the first four months of life. Cow's milk based infant formulas are recommended as the standard product for healthy term infants who are not breastfed.

Nutrition for Healthy Term Infants states that soy based formulas should be used only for those infants who cannot take dairy based products for health, cultural or religious reasons, such as a vegan lifestyle, or galactosemia, a metabolic disorder where infants are unable to metabolize galectose, a sugar in milk. This reiterates the recommendation that was made in “Feeding Babies” published by Health and Welfare Canada in 1986.

Nutrition for Healthy Term Infants also states that soy protein based formulas are inappropriate for infants who are not breastfed and who are at high risk of atopic disease or for those infants with a documented allergy to cow's milk protein. The formulas that should be used in these instances are formulas based on hydrolyzed milk protein; for infants with documented milk allergies, the protein should be extensively hydrolyzed.

With respect to the proposed regulations to change the employment insurance boundaries based on statistical data on unemployment rates in New Brunswick: ( a ) was this statistical data provided by a public or private source; ( b ) what is the name of that source; ( c ) what formula was used to evaluate this data; ( d ) what period of time was used in collecting this data; ( e ) what federal ridings in Canada will be affected by these proposed boundary changes; ( f ) was only a sample from each province used for calculating this statistical data; ( g ) what area in New Brunswick was used for the collection of this statistical data; ( h ) what number of workers were used in the collection of data; ( i ) how were full time workers defined in the collection of data and how many were part of the sample; ( j ) how were part time workers defined in the collection of data and how many were part of the sample; ( k ) how were seasonal workers defined in the collection of data and how many were part of the sample; and ( l ) did the collection of data include consultation with the major employers in the region of New Brunswick Southwest?

With respect to the proposed regulations to change the employment insurance boundaries based on statistical data on unemployment rates in New Brunswick, the response is as follows:

(a) The statistical data was provided by a public source; (b) The name of the public source is Statistics Canada. (c) The data was evaluated using regression analysis and mapping of aggregated and disaggregated indicators. (d) The data came from the 1996 census, from neighbourhood income and demographics data for 1997 and from labour force survey data up to April 2000; (e) No analysis was made of which federal ridings will be affected by these changes; (f) Basic census data are collected for all households in Canada and from one out of every five households on topics such as education, ethnicity, mobility, income and employment; neighbourhood income and demographics data are produced by Statistics Canada on an aggregated basis from all income tax returns filed; the Labour Force Survey is a monthly survey which is based on over 50,000 households in Canada; (g) All areas of New Brunswick were covered by the data. (h) All workers in Canada were covered by the data, numbering 15,047,895 workers; (i) There was no analysis done on full time workers compared to other workers; (j) There was no analysis done on part time workers compared to other workers; (k) Seasonal employment was approximated on the basis of whether workers were employed for 26 weeks or less in the year, producing an estimate of 3,016,430 seasonal workers in Canada and 114,075 in New Brunswick. (l) There was no special data collection or cnsultation aimed at major employers in New Brunswick or elsewhere, aside from the overall opportunity for public comments.

With respect to applications received by the Department of Public Works and Government Services for the fiscal years 1998-99 and 1999-2000: ( a ) how many were received for the sponsorship of community festivals and events in each province and region; and ( b ) how many were rejected in each province and region?

What funds, grants, loans and loan guarantee has the government issued in the constituency of Burnaby—Douglas for each of the following fiscal years: (a) 1997-1998; (b) 1998-1999; and in each case, where applicable: (i) what was the department or agency responsible; (ii) what was the program under which the payment was made; (iii) what were the names of the recipients if they were groups or organizations; (iv) what was the monetary value of the payment made; and (v) what was the percentage of program funding covered by the payment received?

For each of the fiscal years from 1994 to 1998, what were the infrastructure expenditures under the Canada Agri-Infrastructure Program (CAIP), including but not confined to: (a) contractor; (b) location; (c) nature of work undertaken; and (d) total moneys awarded including supplementary funds if any.

With respect to contracts entered into by the government with companies, foundations, and other bodies for consulting services from 1993 up to and including the present day: (a) what contracts has the government entered into with Cantox Inc., its subsidiaries, divisions and representatives for the provision of services; (b) what is the complete list of all documents received by the government, its departments, agencies and other bodies from Cantox Inc., its subsidiaries, divisions and representatives in relation to these contracts; and (c) what are the contracts the government currently holds with Cantox Inc. or any of its subsidiaries?

How much money has the government provided to Intrawest Corporation for each of the fiscal years from 1995-1996 to 1999-2000 for the development and expansion of projects at Mont Tremblant, Quebec; and wherever applicable: (a) what were the funds allocated for; (b) did the project have a cash flow forecast; (c) how many jobs were created from the government's contribution; (d) was there a budget proposal submitted to the government; (e) did Intrawest Corporation owe money to the government at any time; and (f) was there financial monitoring of the project by the government?

From April 1, 1994, to January 31, 2000, in the constituencies of Abitibi—James Bay—Nunavik and Témiscamingue, what grants and contributions did the federal government make, through Human Resources Development Canada and, wherever applicable: (a) under what program and on what date was the money paid out; (b) what are the names of the groups, companies, organizations and other beneficiaries; (c) how many jobs were created; and (d) how much money was paid out?

Mr. Speaker, no agreement could be reached under Standing Order 78(1) or 78(2) regarding consideration at committee stage of Bill C-3, an act in respect of criminal justice for young persons and to amend and repeal other acts.

Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the crown will propose at the next sitting of the House a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stages.

I have received two applications for emergency debates. I received two letters today. The first one I received was from the member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough and the second one was from the member for Roberval. I will hear the member for Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough first because it deals basically with the same subject. I will then hear the hon. member for Roberval.

Mr. Speaker, this Progressive Conservative request is to augment and buttress the arguments that were made earlier by my friend from Roberval. This is completely associated with the same issue, the growing crisis of organized crime in Canada.

There is probably not a single member of the House or very few Canadians who are not aware of what is taking place throughout the country. This is not in any way meant to torque up the debate but to bring it into a tangible form in the House where we can discuss these issues as we should in the Parliament of Canada.

There is an emerging crisis with respect to Asian triads, east bloc Mafia, traditional crime families and biker gangs who are infiltrating our communities throughout the country. I say for my friends in Quebec that this is not just a Quebec issue. This is something we are seeing in an acute way in the province of Quebec around Montreal in particular but there have recently been reports of biker turf wars happening in Kingston, Ontario. It is happening on the west coast to a large degree.

Kingston, Ontario is the area with the highest concentration of federal prisons in Canada yet there are no deterrents for what is taking place. Potential criminals are being released from these prisons right into the waiting arms of organized crime families.

The RCMP commissioner raised this issue in his earliest remarks when he was appointed to that position. Two weeks ago new RCMP Commissioner Zaccardelli stated that organized crime organizations have drafted plans to use bribes to destabilize the country's parliament. This is happening to a significant effect and is something we have to address in this place. It is something the Government of Canada has an innate responsibility to deal with by bringing it to the forefront through a debate where we can discuss methods to approach organized crime in a significant way, the resources required and the strategy in terms of legislation. The provincial attorneys general are similarly calling for it.

We urge the government to act and to act swiftly. I urge the Chair to deem this emergency debate necessary. I would be prepared to move the motion.